alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Before the Third Division,

June 6, 1960

No. 64267.

protests 59/25944 and 59/26535 (New York).

#### Originalities of New York, Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Donlon, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of mother-of-pearl disks similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Paramount Import Export Co. et al.*v. *United States*(45 C.C.P.A. 82, C.A.D. 677), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
**Exhibit
      31.1**




**CERTIFICATION**




I,
      Marcus
      E. Jundt, certify that:




1. I
      have
      reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Kona Grill, Inc.;




2. Based
      on
      my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material
      fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made,
      in
      light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading
      with respect to the period covered by this report;




3. Based
      on
      my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included
      in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,
      results of operations, and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the
      periods presented in this report;




4. The
      registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and
      maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act
      Rules
      13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:




a) Designed
      such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls
      and
      procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material
      information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries,
      is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the
      period in which this report is being prepared;




b) Evaluated
      the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and
      presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the
      disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by this
      report based on such evaluation; and




c) Disclosed
      in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial
      reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the
      registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has
      materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
      registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and




5. The
      registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most
      recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
      registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of
      directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):




a) All
      significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation
      of
      internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to
      adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize, and
      report financial information; and




b) Any
      fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees
      who
      have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial
      reporting.






/s/
                MARCUS E. JUNDTMarcus
                E. Jundt*Chief
                Executive Officer*




Date:
      August 4, 2006
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 9186 

To amend title 10, United States Code, to ensure that medical records 

of the Department of Defense indicate the organizational affiliation of 

certain health care providers. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 30, 2024 

Mr. ARRINGTON introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Armed Services 

A BILL 

To amend title 10, United States Code, to ensure that medical records of the Department of Defense indicate the 

organizational affiliation of certain health care providers. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Private Smither Act 

5 of 2024’’. 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 9186 IH

1 SEC. 2. IDENTIFICATION IN PATIENT MEDICAL RECORDS 

2 OF AFFILIATION OF CERTAIN NON-DEPART3 MENT OF DEFENSE HEALTH CARE PRO4 VIDERS. 

5 Chapter 55 of title 10, United States Code, is amend6 ed by inserting after section 1091 the following new sec7 tion: 

8 ‘‘§ 1091a. Identification in patient medical records of 

9 affiliation of certain non-Department of 

10 Defense health care providers 

11 ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Defense shall 

12 ensure that medical records of the Department of Defense 

13 include the organizational affiliation of any covered health 

14 care provider identified in such medical records. 

15 ‘‘(b) COVERED HEALTH CARE PROVIDER DE16 FINED.—In this section, the term ‘covered health care pro17 vider’ means a health care provider who is not— 

18 ‘‘(1) a member of the uniformed services; 

19 ‘‘(2) an employee of the Department of De20 fense; 

21 ‘‘(3) an employee of another agency of the Fed22 eral Government detailed to the Department of De23 fense; 

24 ‘‘(4) a personal services contractor under sec25 tion 1091 of this title; or 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 9186 IH

1 ‘‘(5) a volunteer under section 1588 of this 

2 title.’’. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
**Exhibit 4.36**

 

**Summaryof the Private Instrument of Commitment to Purchase and Sale of Real Property entered into on April 26, 2018, in connection withFazenda Araucária**

 

**Parties**:Imobiliária Araucária Ltda., as Seller; Fabricio Fries, Diógenes Fries and Vanessa Fries, as Buyers,BrasilAgro – Companhia Brasileira de Propriedades Agrícolas, as intervening-consenting party, and Celso Fries, asguarantor.

 

**Purpose**: Thecommitment to sell a total area of 956.23 hectares, of which 660 hectares are arable, to be originated from Fazenda Araucária,for the total price, in Brazilian national currency (*Reais*), equivalent to 797,040 bags of soybeans, to be paid in eightannual installments, as follows: (i) in the first installment, in Brazilian *Reais*, equivalent to 79,200 bags of soybeansshall be paid on May 3, 2018; (ii) the second installment, in the amount, in Brazilian *Reais*, equivalent to 79,200 bagsof soybeans, shall be paid on September 1, 2018; (iii) the third installment, in the amount, in Brazilian *Reais*, equivalentto 63,640 bags of soybeans, shall be paid on March 1, 2019; (iv) the fourth installment, in the amount, in Brazilian *Reais*,equivalent to 125,000 bags of soybeans, shall be paid on March 1, 2020; (v) the fifth installment, in the amount, in Brazilian*Reais*, equivalent to 125,000 bags of soybeans, shall be paid on March 1, 2021; (vi) the sixth installment, in the amount,in Brazilian *Reais*, equivalent to 125,000 bags of soybeans, shall be paid on March 1, 2022; (vii) the seventh installment,in the amount, in Brazilian *Reais*, equivalent to 100,000 bags of soybeans, shall be paid on March 1, 2023; and, finally(viii) the eight installment, in the amount, in Brazilian *Reais*, equivalent to 100,000 bags of soybeans, shall be paid onMarch 1, 2024.
Exhibit 32.2    CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002  In connection with the Quarterly Report of American Independence Corp. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Teresa A. Herbert, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:   (1)      The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and  (2)      The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.    /s/ Teresa A. Herbert
Chief Financial Officer and Senior Vice President
Date: May 17, 2010   A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.     1
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

November 29, 2005 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
128001 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices

v SC: 128001 COA: 256229 Oakland CC: 97-157047-FC DE’ANGELO DOMON HENDERSON, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application fo r leave to appeal th e December 16, 2004 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has failed to meet the burden of establishi ng entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).

s1121 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

November 29, 2005

Clerk
# C_2007211EN.01003701.xml

| 8.9.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 211/37 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.9.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 211/37

---

Action brought on 20 June 2007 — Prana Haus v OHIM (PRANAHAUS)

(Case T-226/07)

(2007/C 211/71)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Prana Haus (Freiburg, Germany) (represented by N. Hebeis, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Defendant:

Form of order sought

| — | annul the Decision of the First Board of Appeal of 18 April 2007 in Case R 1611/2006-1; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the Decision of the First Board of Appeal of 18 April 2007 in Case R 1611/2006-1;

| — | order the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market to enter trade mark application No 4 839 916 ‘PRANAHAUS’ in the Register of Community trade marks and |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market to enter trade mark application No 4 839 916 ‘PRANAHAUS’ in the Register of Community trade marks and

| — | order the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market to pay the costs of the proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market to pay the costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘PRANAHAUS’ for goods and services in classes 9, 16 and 35 (application No 4 839 916)

Community trade mark concerned:

Decision of the Examiner: Refusal of the application

Decision of the Examiner:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (1), since there is no absolute ground for refusal of registration of the trade mark applied for.

Pleas in law:

1

---

(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark (OJ 1994 L 11, p. 1).

1

---
EXHIBIT 32





CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
AND PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT
OF 2002



I, Kenneth Spiegeland, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report of ACM Corporation on Form 10-K
for the fiscal year ended May 31, 2012, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Form 10-K fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and
results of operations of ACM Corporation.



Date:  January 18, 2013



| | By:  /s/ Kenneth Spiegeland                                                                 | 
| | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | 
| | Kenneth Spiegeland                                                                          | 
| | President, Treasurer                                                                        | 
| | (Principal Executive Officer, Principal Accounting Officer and Principal Financial Officer) |
Exhibit 32





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





Gurpartap Singh Basrai, President, Director,  President, Chief Executive and Operating Officer, Treasurer, and Secretary of Tundra Gold Corp. (the “Company”) certifies, under the standards set forth and solely for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to his knowledge, the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended April 30, 2011 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange  Act of 1934 and information contained in that Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and  results  of operations of the Company.








Dated: July 29, 2011





By: /s/ Gurpartap Singh Basrai


Name: Gurpartap Singh Basrai


Title: Director, President, Chief Executive Officer,


Chief Operating Officer, Treasurer, and Secretary


(Principal Executive, Financial & Accounting Officer)
# C_2007283EN.01000101.xml

| 24.11.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 283/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.11.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 283/1

---

(2007/C 283/01)

Last publication of the Court of Justice in the Official Journal of the European Union

Official Journal of the European Union

OJ C 269, 10.11.2007

OJ C 269, 10.11.2007

Past publications

OJ C 247, 20.10.2007

OJ C 235, 6.10.2007

OJ C 223, 22.9.2007

OJ C 211, 8.9.2007

OJ C 183, 4.8.2007

OJ C 170, 21.7.2007

These texts are available on:

| | EUR-Lex: http://eur-lex.europa.eu |
| --- | --- |

EUR-Lex: http://eur-lex.europa.eu

---
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FIFTH CIRCUIT

____________

No. 99-50669

____________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

HUGH VON MESHACK; LAWAYNE THOMAS;

LINDA PARKER; TERRANCE IAN HODGES,

also known as Guda;

Defendants - Appellants.

Appeal from the United States District Court

For the Western District of Texas, Waco

March 7, 2001

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING

(Opinion, August 28, 2000, 5 Cir. 2000, ___F.3d___)

Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

IT IS ORDERED that the petition for panel rehearing is GRANTED in part: We STRIKE

footnote 20 in our previous opinion and replace it with the following: 

On remand, the district court must resentence Meshack pursuant to 21 U.S.C. §
-2-

841(b)(1)(C). Due to his prior convictions, Meshack may be resentenced to a

maximum of 30 years. 

We also STRIKE the following text in Section III: “See United States v. Rios-Quintero, 204

F.3d 214, 215 (5th Cir. 2000) (reviewing for plain error even though the case the defendants relied

upon was not decided at the time of trial).” We substitute in its place: “See United States v. Johnson,

520 U.S. 461, 467, 117 S.Ct. 1544, 1549, 137 L.Ed.2d 718 (1997) (reviewing for plain error even

though the case on which the defendants relied had not been decided at the time of trial).”

Finally, we STRIKE the text in Section III A beginning with “We decline to exercise our

discretion in this manner here because Hodges can show no meaningful benefit . . .” and ending with

“Thus, we find there was no plain error in Hodges’s sentence for marijuana possession.” In its place

we insert the following:

We decline to exercise our discretion in this manner here because Hodges can show no

meaningful benefit he would receive from vacating this sentence.19 Cf. United States v.

Williams, 183 F.3d 458, 464 (5thCir. 1999) (“[L]eaving Williamsonincarcerated for 30 years

when he should have been sentenced to no more than 15 under existing precedent, especially

when we gave the benefit of the legal rule to others appealing their convictions during that

time,seriouslywould affect the fairness, integrityand public reputation ofjudicialproceedings

by undermining the rule of law”). He will not serve less time as a result of resentencing on

this count. Moreover, he has not asserted that our decision not to correct the sentence will

have collateral consequences. Thus, we find there was no plain error in Hodges’s sentence

for marijuana possession. 

______________________

19 Hodges cannot show that correcting the error would invalidate one of the convictions

against him, as the conceded error does not call Hodges’s conviction into question. 

In all other respects, the petition for panel rehearing is DENIED.

ENTERED FOR THE COURT:

_________________________________

EMILIO M. GARZA

UNITED STATES CIRCUIT JUDGE
A90A0451.

#### SPARKS v. SOUTHWEST COMMUNITY HOSPITAL & MEDICAL CENTER, INC.

(395 SE2d 68)

Carley, Chief Judge.

When he broke his leg, appellant-plaintiff became a patient at appellee-defendant hospital. Appellant’s leg was re-injured while he was being transported in a wheelchair by appellee’s supervisor of patient transportation. As the result of this re-injury, appellant filed this suit, alleging that “[t]he wheelchair being used was an improper type and not designed for the transfer and portage of patients in [his] condition ...” and that appellee “by and through its agents and/or employees was negligent in the diagnosis, treatment, and care which they rendered to [him].” Appellee answered, denying the material allegations of appellant’s complaint.

The case was tried before a jury and a verdict in appellee’s favor was returned. Appellant appeals from the judgment that was entered by the trial court on the jury’s verdict. In his sole enumeration of error, appellant urges that this was not a professional negligence action requiring expert testimony and that the trial court erred in charging the jury that it was.

“ ‘The requirement that expert testimony be adduced in a medical malpractice case is premised upon the existence in such a case of “medical questions” which control its resolution. (Cits.) . . .’ [Cit.] The question here is whether [appellee] deviated from the applicable standard of care in its [choice of the type of wheelchair to be used to transport] a patient in the condition and circumstances of [appellant]. [Cit.] The evidence here clearly indicates that the medical condition of the patient was the determinative factor as to the [type of wheelchair which should be used] by the hospital staff. Thus, the alleged negligent act required the exercise of expert medical judgment by [appellee’s] staff. [Cit.]” *General Hospitals of Humana v. Bentley,*184 Ga. App. 489, 490-91 (361 SE2d 718) (1987).

Appellant’s reliance on *Candler Gen. Hosp. v. McNorrill,*182 Ga. App. 107, 110 (2) (354 SE2d 872) (1987), is misplaced. In that case, “the only issue was the nurse’s decision to undertake the physical act of moving the patient from a stretcher or casting table to a [wheelchair], which was ‘merely an act of relative physical strength and dexterity rather than an act requiring the exercise of expert medical judgment.’ [Cits.] . . . Since the instant case, unlike *Candler Gen. Hosp.,*involved the questioning of [an] expert . . . [judgment], the trial court did not err in treating it as a professional malpractice case and [instructing the jury accordingly].” *Chafin v. Wesley Homes,*186 Ga. App. 403 (1), 404 (367 SE2d 236) (1988).

*Judgment affirmed.*

*McMurray, P. J., and Sognier, J., concur.*

*859Decided June 7, 1990.

*Ellerin & Associates, Irwin M. Ellerin, Denise A. Hinds,*for appellant.

*Smith, Gambrell & Russell, David M. Brown, Rosemary Smith,*for appellee.
No. 76-524.

#### Arms et ux. *v.*Watson, Trustee, et al.

Sup. Ct. Minn. Certiorari denied.
# C_2007283EN.01003701.xml

| 24.11.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 283/37 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.11.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 283/37

---

Action brought on 27 September 2007 — EOS v OHIM (PrimeCast)

(Case T-373/07)

(2007/C 283/67)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: EOS GmbH Electro Optical Systems (Krailling, Germany) (represented by M. Mentjes, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Defendant:

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market of 20 July 2007 in Case R 333/2005-4, notified to the applicant by facsimile on 27 July 2007; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market of 20 July 2007 in Case R 333/2005-4, notified to the applicant by facsimile on 27 July 2007;

| — | Order the defendant to pay the costs in accordance with Article 87(2) and (5) of the Rules of Procedure. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the defendant to pay the costs in accordance with Article 87(2) and (5) of the Rules of Procedure.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Community trade mark concerned: the verbal mark ‘PrimeCast’ for goods and services in Classes 1, 19, 40 and 42 (Application No 2854677).

Community trade mark concerned:

Decision of the Examiner: refusal in part of the application.

Decision of the Examiner:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: dismissal of the appeal.

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: Breach of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (1).

Pleas in law:

1

---

(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark (OJ 1994 L 11, p. 1).

1

---
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with this Form 10-Q/A (Amendment No. 1) to the quarterly report of G2 Ventures, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for
the period ending June 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 7, 2009 (the Report), I, Gust Kepler, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted
pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                       
|-----------------------
|/s/ Gust Kepler        
|Gust Kepler            
|Chief Executive Officer
|August 7, 2009         

A signed original of this certification has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.